This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ΚΑΤΑΝΑΛΩΤΗΣ
Pages: 1 ... 567 89 ... 256
181
« on: December 21, 2016, 12:22:52 PM »
Every time I get a package from Finland or anywhere else in Europe, USPS refuses to deliver it and I have to drive 30 minutes to their office.
182
« on: December 20, 2016, 03:00:26 PM »
183
« on: December 20, 2016, 02:58:31 PM »
I hope Assad burns every subhuman Salafi rat alive for this.
>He thinks the murder of Russian is a bad thing
My understanding was that this dude was a pretty big part of the improving relations between Russia and Turkey. I know you fags love the idea of your favorite boogeymen getting killed, but tensions or conflict between Russia and one of the major players in NATO would not be pretty. More disgusting than that, though, is the fact that people are cheering on the assassination of a country's ambassador by an islamist terrorist. Real life isn't a Tom Clancy movie.
184
« on: December 20, 2016, 01:58:58 PM »
I hope Assad burns every subhuman Salafi rat alive for this.
185
« on: December 19, 2016, 09:03:43 PM »
Surprise, turns out he was a Pakistani refugee
This shit really needs to stop
186
« on: December 18, 2016, 12:39:09 PM »
187
« on: December 17, 2016, 10:31:42 AM »
Isn't Belgium divided up under multiple governments? Do I understand that correctly?
188
« on: December 17, 2016, 12:38:14 AM »
Clinton's No-Fly zone plans were quite blatantly intended to prevent Russia from supporting Assad's forces with bombers and allow the jihadist moderate terrorists rebels to operate unchecked.
I don't believe Trump's just doing this as a "fuck you" to Assad and Russia, but I'd like to know more about his intentions and plans here. This does raise an eyebrow.
189
« on: December 16, 2016, 12:44:39 PM »
What was even the beef again? Was it the director saying the Empire is a white supremacist organization in his headcanon?
190
« on: December 15, 2016, 08:01:32 PM »
Yeah no fuck NC republicans. Fucking scumbags they are. I'm really glad I voted for cooper, you don't see many moderate Dems these days.
And they tried real fuckin hard to keep him out, too. McCrory was pulling recount shenanigan stall tactics for weeks after election day, long after it was clear who'd won.
191
« on: December 13, 2016, 01:37:49 PM »
Dura lex, sed lex.
>mfw i try and use the rule of law to justify capricious despotism
mfw it's okay to kill police and behead religious minorities because Obama is paying me I'm not allowed to vote.
192
« on: December 13, 2016, 10:55:28 AM »
We had a revolution which aimed to correct the broken things in the country, The fact that Syria was a stable country hostile to US and Israeli interests? but unfortunately through persistent aggression and violence by the regime, Dura lex, sed lex. Today, we have a regime, which is a shell of its former self, heavily backed by Iraqi, Lebanese, and Iranian foreign militias and Russian military might, which just recaptured Aleppo, and will most likely emerge from this war as the absolute victor. The same corrupt, inept regime, but now even more so. I actually disagree. I think this will likely make Assad a somewhat less brutal ruler, although to what extent I don't know. I can explain why if you'd like. Now we are left with this, and a country as fractured as ever (and mostly destroyed), with a plethora of huge problems to solve (how will we reincorporate refugees? For a lot of them you probably can't. They've tasted western gibs and won't go back. Maybe the ones in Jordan and Lebanon will go home, i don't know. How will we restructure the government to ensure inclusiveness and prevent further unrest by the disenfranchised? Brah, Assad's government was super inclusive. Alawis, Christians, Sunni, Shia. It was the rebels who pushed sectarianism However, don't sit here and make believe that everything is OK now, and everything in Syria is going to be OK.
The war's not over yet, anyway. ISIS just retook Palmyra. The Nusrats and kin aren't totally destroyed yet. Assad has a long way to go.
193
« on: December 12, 2016, 03:50:33 PM »
Personally, I see this as a matter of principle. Someone reporting on a war while taking part in the fighting throws away all credibility as a source of information. You might as well be a frontline propagandist. Willingness to use lethal force against one side in aid of the other is a clear indication of partisanship.
194
« on: December 12, 2016, 01:45:21 PM »
195
« on: December 12, 2016, 03:55:51 AM »
 >even the bombers the Chinks use to sabre-rattle are knockoffs of foreign designs. You can't make this shit up. What a fucking trash nation.
196
« on: December 11, 2016, 11:05:30 PM »
Do people actually think Putin wants closer ties with the US? No, but I don't think he wants war with us, either.
and then we'll keep doing the same shit we've been doing since the USSR fell". Struggle economically while working tirelessly and arguably in vain to root out corruption and reestablish itself as a sovereign nation with global influence?
Of course they don't want war with us. No major country does.
and struggle economically? They brought that on themselves with the fresh new sanctions. hahahaha Their economy was on an uptic. And rooting out corruption? No I think not. If that was the case, Putin and his oligarchs wouldn't be ruling since 1999, and assassinating people who speak out against him. Putin's rise to power and dominance necessarily entailed the subjugation of the oligarchs that ran the country in the 90s. This is a Russian tradition going back to Ivan the Terrible. If you think Russia is corrupt now, you'd be blown away by their situation in the 90s, when US and Soros-backed oligarchs bled the country dry. And sorry, but Russia being a global influence is bad if they try to continue their agenda of Anti-Europe/America "Russia is bad because they disrupt our imperialist and homogenizing policies on the world stage. Just submit and get on the Right Side of History, goy." and keep trying to destabilize things. I'm sorry, which country has been using clandestine regime change and inciting terrorism/violent revolution as a standard method of dealing with unsympathetic states since forfuckingever?
197
« on: December 11, 2016, 10:20:41 PM »
Do people actually think Putin wants closer ties with the US? No, but I don't think he wants war with us, either. and then we'll keep doing the same shit we've been doing since the USSR fell". Struggle economically while working tirelessly and arguably in vain to root out corruption and reestablish itself as a sovereign nation with global influence?
198
« on: December 11, 2016, 10:18:16 PM »
It is only dangerous if you consider the implications it has for the sacred institution of democracy.
Of course, I also understand that the US is not 100% democratic and that the holders of representative offices are largely decided by the results of massive propaganda campaigns funded by wealthy businessmen and special interests groups, both domestic and foreign, so I don't expect your average joe to know the implications of his choice and I can't really blame him for it. Which is why I'm not crying over the election of a candidate who has promoted policies favorable to an "enemy" country as opposed to a candidate who was taking money from every country she could get a "speaking gig" in. You can't really damage the integrity of an institution that had none in the first place. No. It is always dangerous.
It's an ideology that demands fellow countrymen be recognized as enemy combatants and threats to the nation overnight. You keep using the word "democracy" but then depict it as factional warfare where honest mistakes, an inability to foresee the future, and a simple lack of information are all that's necessary for civilians exercising their freedom of speech to become public enemy #1. It blurs the line between the private individual and public institutions to the point that they are somehow one in the same.
It is a tremendously distorted view of US institutions that has zero basis in reality.
The entire point of democracy is to put power and influence in the hands of whatever number of individuals are considered citizens, no? Democracy means "rule by the Demos". The people, the common man. Do we live in a democracy or not? If we do, then by definition the people are accountable. If we do not, the ruling class is to blame. I wasn't sure, because you've spent this entire thread advocating for the collapse of US institutions by a foreign power. I'd advocate for the reformation of our democratic system whether or not Russia was a player. But an imperialist state that refuses to respect the institutions of others, yes, should be undermined. You really think a country that assassinates opposition journalists is going to "do right" by the world by contributing to freedom of information? You're beyond delusional. You need professional help.
No, I expect it to do right by its people, as I expect of any government. When I advocate for the usurpation of American geopolitical dominance, I'm not asking for it to be replaced by the Russians or Chinese. I just think too much influence in the hands of one country is and has been catastrophic. Superpowers should be balanced by other superpowers. America gave up its "Good guy world police" status when the Soviet Union collapsed and the US started waving its dick around like a 14 year old in a brothel. Russia would do the same or worse in that position, too. Russia, though, currently stands as a challenger to what I see as the gross abuse of power and influence by the United States, and I am in favor of the actions it takes to balance things out. Will that change? Maybe, and my attitude toward Russia would change accordingly if it did. I don't support the killing or imprisonment of journalists or nonviolent dissidents anywhere, but I don't think that means I should completely disregard the handful of good things Putin's regime does bring about.
199
« on: December 11, 2016, 09:41:54 PM »
Do you or do you not believe in democratic government?
Of course I would not blame you personally for the actions of the US government any more than I would blame myself. But if you endorse representative democracy, the system pushed in the US, you are effectively backing the notion that you are in some way accountable.
You simply cannot have it both ways. Do the people have the right to a measure of control over the state? If they are given the reigns, via elected representatives or whatever else, they are accountable. You cannot one day demand the voice of the people be heard, and the next day shrink from responsibility when that voice elects a villain. The notion that voting for someone is the same as being directly responsible for their actions is a dangerous and foolish one. Should we imprison everyone who voted for Bill Janklow? (The only correct answer is no.) You have extremely nonsensical concepts of democracy and the burden of responsibility.
It is only dangerous if you consider the implications it has for the sacred institution of democracy. Of course, I also understand that the US is not 100% democratic and that the holders of representative offices are largely decided by the results of massive propaganda campaigns funded by wealthy businessmen and special interests groups, both domestic and foreign, so I don't expect your average joe to know the implications of his choice and I can't really blame him for it. Which is why I'm not crying over the election of a candidate who has promoted policies favorable to an "enemy" country as opposed to a candidate who was taking money from every country she could get a "speaking gig" in. You can't really damage the integrity of an institution that had none in the first place. The US government's foreign policy since the fall of the Soviet Union has made it quite clear that the only justification needed for any action is the means to carry it out.
I think you're being melodramatic as fuck, too.
I'm being melodramatic? You can defect any time you like, pal.
I don't really feel like I'm on anybody's team and therefore I don't think "defecting" is something I can do. I don't feel represented by the US gov't or any other government and I don't feel like I have an obligation to defend it. I think loyalty is owed firstly to God and then to tribe or nation, not to any particular state or regime. I don't love Putin or his government. I don't like a lot of what he's done domestically or on the world stage. But when he does something right, he does something right.
200
« on: December 11, 2016, 09:18:13 PM »
Ted Bundy.
That dude was fucking superhuman. He pulled off shit that should have been impossible. I remember reading about the time he broke into a sorority house and was basically invisible. I was seriously questioning whether I believed what I was reading at that point.
201
« on: December 11, 2016, 08:46:43 PM »
This is the nature of democratic election. Yes, when you elect a politician, he is your representative. You are accountable for what he does, because you voted for him. "But what if I didn't vote for him?", you might ask. Well, too fucking bad, the democratist will say, you lost the election. This is one of the many reasons why democracy is stupid and gay. I'm sorry, I didn't know I was personally responsible for the actions of military and intelligence officials who may have been appointed by people I didn't vote for, and are insulated from political influence by having (or not having) term limits independent of the president or Congress. Officials may be "representatives" as a ceremonial title, but being represented by them is in no way a tacit endorsement of everything and anything they do. What you're describing is not a democracy by any stretch of the imagination, especially not that of the United States.
Furthermore, I have no control over someone else's free will, so my "guilt" for anything and everything they do is something you pulled out of your sphincter. You don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about.
Do you or do you not believe in democratic government? Of course I would not blame you personally for the actions of the US government any more than I would blame myself. But if you endorse representative democracy, the system pushed in the US, you are effectively backing the notion that you are in some way accountable. You simply cannot have it both ways. Do the people have the right to a measure of control over the state? If they are given the reigns, via elected representatives or whatever else, they are accountable. You cannot one day demand the voice of the people be heard, and the next day shrink from responsibility when that voice elects a villain. I mean, jesus christ man, look at the language you use. "russia should go unpunished", as if the US and its vassals get to make up the rules of international relations as they go along, and anyone who refuses to play along is a child in need of a spanking.
Russia may have committed an act of war against the United States. An eye for an eye is not a valid justification for their actions.
The US government's foreign policy since the fall of the Soviet Union has made it quite clear that the only justification needed for any action is the means to carry it out. I think you're being melodramatic as fuck, too.
202
« on: December 11, 2016, 08:15:54 PM »
inb4 "this proves Russia dindu nuffin"
Brah, Russia would've still dindu nuffin if they were behind the leaks. There's nothing wrong with exposing dirt on any political candidate or faction in any country.
>there is nothing wrong with interfering in a sovereign democratic election
nice ethical bankruptcy
No, there isn't. There's a problem with subverting one.
You could make a solid case that this is Russia's motivation, of course, but there's a difference between interference and subversion.
Subversion is a form of interference. You're truly delusional if you can't see that.
If subversion is a form of interference, US officials really have no ground to stand on by calling out Russia.
It's not like the USG hasn't done the same, but I don't think that's an excuse.
the US has done far worse than what Russia is accused of doing in this case.
And while I don't really believe the Russians have done shit, even if they did, this is kind of a "get what's coming to you" moment. If the United States wants to continue pursuing foreign policy that violates international law and the integrity and inner workings of sovereign nations, its leaders have no business crying when the same things befall them. I think it's a fine excuse.
I don't give a fuck if the Russians did interfere in our election because I don't support our government trying to make decisions for the rest of the world. Iraq was a fucking crime, Libya was a fucking crime, Syria is a botched crime still in progress.
I believe in the sovereignty of independent states, and I'd like my own to be sovereign, but I can't really advocate for that when the officials that are supposed to represent me are trying to establish a global hegemony, with their fingers in everyone else's pies.
Hypocrisy on behalf of the US is not a justification for another country doing the same. (I am not defending the US' meddling in other countries' elections.)
It isn't a justification for, say, Zambia doing it to Chile, but it is entirely reasonable to give the US a taste of its own medicine.
A side-effect of your position is the normalization Truly normalization is the most heinous crime of 2016.
of this kind of behavior and letting it going unpunished. The US shouldn't do it, nor should any other country. Unfortunately, the US is doing it, and will continue to do it unless A) the US is crippled geopolitically or B) an isolationist regime takes power (the latter may have just happened, we'll see)
If Russia did interfere in the election, it should be punished regardless of whatever the US is guilty of itself. Violation of sovereignty is one of the highest crimes a country can commit against another.
LMAO fuck off. Russia allegedly did it in order to cockblock a politician hellbent on starting "democratic revolutions" in every country not trading in USD and enslaving itself to the IMF. If it really happened, this would have been a violation of sovereignty done in order to prevent further violation of everyone's sovereignty.
There is no "regardless of whatever the US is guilty of", because a humongous chunk of the geopolitical assfuckery in the world right now, including this, is a result of shit the US political establishment is guilty of. None of these people have any right to start pointing fingers at Russia, given their own treatment of countries that would prefer to stay out of the USA's sphere of influence, as well as their quite open ties to states like Saudi Arabia and Israel. Nobody in the media pressing this red scare shit seems to have been half as concerned about Clinton's relationship with the Saudis or the Chinese (the latter having been a common concern during Bill's presidency). That says a lot to me.
You're arguing that:
1) The entire population of the United States, a sovereign nation, deserved to have its democratic election disrupted as retribution for its government's actions abroad, despite that many of those actions are completely secret and unaccountable, and not necessarily endorsed by the citizenry, due to the nature of espionage
This is the nature of democratic election. Yes, when you elect a politician, he is your representative. You are accountable for what he does, because you voted for him. "But what if I didn't vote for him?", you might ask. Well, too fucking bad, the democratist will say, you lost the election. This is one of the many reasons why democracy is stupid and gay. 2) Russia should go completely unpunished for this transgression, assuming they did it Russia should not face retribution for this alleged transgression until the United States faces retribution for its own. You can pretend there are no rules and no laws all you want, if you have the power to bend or break them. But if you do, there will come a time when someone is able to bend the law at your expense, and you will wish dearly that you had not set a precedent for them. Are you legitimately brain damaged?
I mean, jesus christ man, look at the language you use. "russia should go unpunished", as if the US and its vassals get to make up the rules of international relations as they go along, and anyone who refuses to play along is a child in need of a spanking.
203
« on: December 11, 2016, 07:02:09 PM »
inb4 "this proves Russia dindu nuffin"
Brah, Russia would've still dindu nuffin if they were behind the leaks. There's nothing wrong with exposing dirt on any political candidate or faction in any country.
>there is nothing wrong with interfering in a sovereign democratic election
nice ethical bankruptcy
No, there isn't. There's a problem with subverting one.
You could make a solid case that this is Russia's motivation, of course, but there's a difference between interference and subversion.
Subversion is a form of interference. You're truly delusional if you can't see that.
If subversion is a form of interference, US officials really have no ground to stand on by calling out Russia.
It's not like the USG hasn't done the same, but I don't think that's an excuse.
the US has done far worse than what Russia is accused of doing in this case.
And while I don't really believe the Russians have done shit, even if they did, this is kind of a "get what's coming to you" moment. If the United States wants to continue pursuing foreign policy that violates international law and the integrity and inner workings of sovereign nations, its leaders have no business crying when the same things befall them. I think it's a fine excuse.
I don't give a fuck if the Russians did interfere in our election because I don't support our government trying to make decisions for the rest of the world. Iraq was a fucking crime, Libya was a fucking crime, Syria is a botched crime still in progress.
I believe in the sovereignty of independent states, and I'd like my own to be sovereign, but I can't really advocate for that when the officials that are supposed to represent me are trying to establish a global hegemony, with their fingers in everyone else's pies.
Hypocrisy on behalf of the US is not a justification for another country doing the same. (I am not defending the US' meddling in other countries' elections.)
It isn't a justification for, say, Zambia doing it to Chile, but it is entirely reasonable to give the US a taste of its own medicine. A side-effect of your position is the normalization Truly normalization is the most heinous crime of 2016. of this kind of behavior and letting it going unpunished. The US shouldn't do it, nor should any other country. Unfortunately, the US is doing it, and will continue to do it unless A) the US is crippled geopolitically or B) an isolationist regime takes power (the latter may have just happened, we'll see) If Russia did interfere in the election, it should be punished regardless of whatever the US is guilty of itself. Violation of sovereignty is one of the highest crimes a country can commit against another.
LMAO fuck off. Russia allegedly did it in order to cockblock a politician hellbent on starting "democratic revolutions" in every country not trading in USD and enslaving itself to the IMF. If it really happened, this would have been a violation of sovereignty done in order to prevent further violation of everyone's sovereignty. There is no "regardless of whatever the US is guilty of", because a humongous chunk of the geopolitical assfuckery in the world right now, including this, is a result of shit the US political establishment is guilty of. None of these people have any right to start pointing fingers at Russia, given their own treatment of countries that would prefer to stay out of the USA's sphere of influence, as well as their quite open ties to states like Saudi Arabia and Israel. Nobody in the media pressing this red scare shit seems to have been half as concerned about Clinton's relationship with the Saudis or the Chinese (the latter having been a common concern during Bill's presidency). That says a lot to me.
204
« on: December 11, 2016, 04:11:39 PM »
inb4 "this proves Russia dindu nuffin"
Brah, Russia would've still dindu nuffin if they were behind the leaks. There's nothing wrong with exposing dirt on any political candidate or faction in any country.
>there is nothing wrong with interfering in a sovereign democratic election
nice ethical bankruptcy
No, there isn't. There's a problem with subverting one.
You could make a solid case that this is Russia's motivation, of course, but there's a difference between interference and subversion.
Subversion is a form of interference. You're truly delusional if you can't see that.
If subversion is a form of interference, US officials really have no ground to stand on by calling out Russia.
It's not like the USG hasn't done the same, but I don't think that's an excuse.
the US has done far worse than what Russia is accused of doing in this case. And while I don't really believe the Russians have done shit, even if they did, this is kind of a "get what's coming to you" moment. If the United States wants to continue pursuing foreign policy that violates international law and the integrity and inner workings of sovereign nations, its leaders have no business crying when the same things befall them. I think it's a fine excuse. I don't give a fuck if the Russians did interfere in our election because I don't support our government trying to make decisions for the rest of the world. Iraq was a fucking crime, Libya was a fucking crime, Syria is a botched crime still in progress. I believe in the sovereignty of independent states, and I'd like my own to be sovereign, but I can't really advocate for that when the officials that are supposed to represent me are trying to establish a global hegemony, with their fingers in everyone else's pies.
205
« on: December 11, 2016, 03:58:47 PM »
inb4 "this proves Russia dindu nuffin"
Brah, Russia would've still dindu nuffin if they were behind the leaks. There's nothing wrong with exposing dirt on any political candidate or faction in any country.
>there is nothing wrong with interfering in a sovereign democratic election
nice ethical bankruptcy
No, there isn't. There's a problem with subverting one.
You could make a solid case that this is Russia's motivation, of course, but there's a difference between interference and subversion.
Subversion is a form of interference. You're truly delusional if you can't see that.
If subversion is a form of interference, US officials really have no ground to stand on when calling out Russia.
206
« on: December 11, 2016, 10:51:55 AM »
I think Russia is probably low on his list of priorities.
207
« on: December 11, 2016, 10:50:44 AM »
Based Geert
208
« on: December 11, 2016, 10:50:10 AM »
inb4 "this proves Russia dindu nuffin"
Brah, Russia would've still dindu nuffin if they were behind the leaks. There's nothing wrong with exposing dirt on any political candidate or faction in any country.
209
« on: December 10, 2016, 06:25:09 PM »
We're living in unprecedented times. Did Russia at least have an influence via hacks into the DNC and by propagating fake news? Undoubtedly.
Those sneaky commies rigged the campaign by informing American voters? How dare they!
A flood of fake news is "informing voters."
K
Fake news is a non-issue conjured up by our media-news industry to excuse itself for believing shitty polls and acting as a massive propaganda machine without having to admit that it fucked up.
210
« on: December 10, 2016, 10:29:16 AM »
We're living in unprecedented times. Did Russia at least have an influence via hacks into the DNC and by propagating fake news? Undoubtedly.
Those sneaky commies rigged the campaign by informing American voters? How dare they!
Pages: 1 ... 567 89 ... 256
|
Show Posts
